CHICAGO - Alexi Giannoulias and Mark Kirk both brought their lists to their third, final, and most directly engaged debate in the ugly, dead-even race for President Barack Obama’s old seat in Illinois.

“This is a list of loans made to convicted mobsters and felons,” Kirk said of his Democratic opponent.

Text Size

VIDEO: Ill. Senate debate

POLITICO 44

“I’ve got my own list, and if we want to play these guilt by association attacks, let’s do it,” Giannoulias responded, rattling off the names of five “criminals who you took money from.”

Moments later, the Democrat added: “I’ve decided for the rest of this campaign to go positive.”

Wednesday’s debate marked how little this campaign has moved since it was rocked by a pair of scandals: First the collapse, in April, of Giannoulias’s family bank; and then, starting on Memorial Day weekend, reports of Kirk’s unspooling set of exaggerations of his own impressive military record. Though the candidates have attempted – and attempted again Wednesday – to shift the debate toward the issues they’ve embraced, both retreated under fire to the strategy that has defined the race for months: Each tried to disqualify the other.

Kirk, 51, shook his head censoriously after Giannoulias, 34, expressed his reservations about the TARP bank bailout program.

“This is the sort of immaturity of my opponent,” said Kirk, explaining after the hourlong debate in the studios of WTTW, Chicago’s public television station.

Giannoulias, for his part, interrupted his new positive message long enough to take a shot at Kirk’s “phantom teaching career” and to marvel both at the strength of his opponent's Naval record and “why you lied about it.”

Kirk is one of the rare GOP moderates, and his centrist politics, sterling resume, and his glib young opponent’s woes left a momentary impression earlier this year that the race was his to lose. But the combination of personal exaggerations and reversals during the Republican primary left him struggling to hold on to his reputation as a moderate in a state that has regularly sent moderate Republicans to statewide office.

He returned repeatedly in the debate to his credentials as an endangered moderate. “The path to partisanship,” Kirk said, “is the path to leadership” in the House of Representatives, explaining that he’d deliberately sought Democratic co-sponsors and consensus causes.

“Most Americans are centrists and moderates who want to make things happen and the question is who represents us,” he said. “I’ve tried to be very moderate, very centrist, very coalition-building.”

Kirk also used unusually harsh language for the Bush administration’s drive to Iraq, describing secret briefings in which he was shown centrifuges and designs for unmanned aerial vehicles that CIA officials said in the run-up to war proved that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction.

Readers' Comments (19)

Alexi G. has done nothing in his life to even deserve to run for Senate.

What little he'd manage to accomplish in his life has ended as a failure. He drove his family bank off the cliff ending up costing us a huge load of money. The Sudent Loans program is another failure. And he is planning to sit on a banking committee if elected? Why should we trust him if he could not manage even his own bank's finances? He is just an empty suit who will do whatever Obama wants him to do. We've had enough of these "Yes" men on the Hill.

The words political corruption, deception, arm-twisting, bullying, bribery and many more might have originated with the Obama-era democrats.

They have failed to listen to their constituents. They have forgotten who they work for. They do not understand that their job is to represent us on the Hill and at the White House, not the other way around.

Alexi Giannoulias is one of those corrupt Democrats. He is inexperienced, incompetent and arrogant - real empty suit.

I live in Illinois and it's a horrible decision we face, choosing between these two dwarfs.

Neither candidate is worthy of my vote. For reasons best explained by "stupidity" Kirk embellished his military service record and that, in my humble opinion, disqualifies him. As for Giann-idiot, what can one say besides "we deserved better"? He's an embarrassment.

The system that produces candidates for high office here is fatally flawed. I thank our lucky stars that we didn't get saddled with Jesse Jackson Jr. as the candidate, let alone the appointed incumbent Senator running for re-election. Having failed to buy that office like a piece of meat hanging from a hook (rumor has it ...) from his favorite butcher, Rod Blagojevich, who has his own problems these days, (rumor has it that) J-J-Jr. now confronts a saga of his own making titled "One-too-many Mistresses In My Closet".

Which begs this question: confronting such a terrible situation what should one do?

Look upon the brighter side of life, the so-called "Big Picture"? That Big Picture is described easily enough, with this question: would allowing control of both the Senate and House of Representatives to slip back into Tea/Republican Party hands be more terrible than electing some negligibly qualified Democratic Party apparatchik? An apparatchik like ex-President Bush-43, who never held a real job and is so incompetent that he destroyed everything he touched (supported by his Party because "He might be a *******, but he's our ******* ....")?

Allowing control of Congress to slip back into unfettered Republican hands would be far worse, in my opinion. Not initially. Initially, Republicans will pretend to be filled with sweetness and light. They will declare themselves willing to go along to get along, to work for The Nation's good, to compromise with the now-damaged Obama Administration. But the Crazies will still run riot in the territories so the inevitable low-level sniping between the Parties will develop into a full blown war by the middle of 2011, becoming an absolute horror when the nomination battles begin. At least we won't be treated to the spectacle of California Gov. Meg Whitman riding into Washington D.C. on a white horse proclaiming herself the Right Hand of God.

The only other option, to do the clearly moral thing -- vote Green, Libertarian, or for someone independent / 3rd Party would be to throw that vote away.

Giannoulius has failed to explain his connections to "Chicago Outfit" bookmakers whenever he is asked and his respones to basic policy questions show that he is ill prepared to be serving in Washingon. I regret that he was able to out spend David Hoffman who would of been an excellent Senator.

I live in Illinois. Mark Kirk is imperfect but he has a stellar career. I live in his district - he works hard, performs great military duties, holds conference calls with constituents, responds to you with truth and honesty and is just genuinely a good guy. Why he would exaggerate is just puzzling to everyone??? But I just always feel like I need a shower after seeing Giannoulius. There is just something unseemly about him. It's the way I feel about Quinn too. I don't know what it is, but my gut-o-meter goes off and makes the decision easy for me.

Allowing control of Congress to slip back into unfettered Republican hands would be far worse, in my opinion. Not initially. Initially, Republicans will pretend to be filled with sweetness and light. They will declare themselves willing to go along to get along, to work for The Nation's good, to compromise with the now-damaged Obama Administration. But the Crazies will still run riot in the territories so the inevitable low-level sniping between the Parties will develop into a full blown war by the middle of 2011, becoming an absolute horror when the nomination battles begin. At least we won't be treated to the spectacle of California Gov. Meg Whitman riding into Washington D.C. on a white horse proclaiming herself the Right Hand of God.

Gridlock is good for the economy. Vote for Kirk and let the fights begin. The Obama radical leftist agenda needs to be stopped. Simple as that!

Alexi will win because Chicago only votes for the worst, sleeziest people. It is the Chicago way. Corruption runs so deep there. How many governors in other states have been indicted on criminal charges while city officials are under investigation? Alexi's family bank gave willingly to the mafia and for some reason this is a close election? Sleezy, sleezy, sleezy. Just because Kirk embellished a little on his Naval record. Geez, at least the man served his country while Alexi slept with the mafia. But, again, I would be SURPRISED if Ill. changed course and the people did the right thing. They will vote in the mafia guy because that is what the people of Illinois do. They vote in the loosers.

I lived in Illinois for 38 years and I am ashamed of how corrupt this state is.

Alexi is a spoiled brat kid, who did nothing but negative campaign for the first 8 months of this campaign, now he wants to go positive because that clearly hasn't been working. Listen...in my district they could put a monkey in a suit and label him Democrat and he'd get elected, so you have to be an utter failure such as Phil Hare to not get elected.

What do you have to lose by voting for Kirk? He has a great career, and great resume, and unlike Alexi has actually worked in his life. If Kirk doesn't work out we'll vote him out next time. But the state of Illinois deserves better than what we've been giving ourselves.

One of these guys has dealt with mob personnel. Let's try not to get the gangsters friend in office. Chicago already has a terrible name for itself. America wants to be its exceptional self! We strive form honesty and the nation we once had! Dem congress since 2006 has done it's damage.

Anyone with even the vaguest concern for individual freedom would realize that socialism is a fatal desease dressed up as a social medicine for what ails us. Only they determine what ails us. SHUT THEM DOWN NOW BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE. FRANCE IS GONE. ENGLAND IS GOING. WE ARE NEXT. OUR PRESIDENT IS ASSAULTING ARIZONA, THE SUPREME COURT, THE MEDICAL INDUSTRY, THE MILITARY, OUR ALLIES, FOX NEWS, THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY, THE AUTO INDUSTRY, THE ENERGY INDUSTRY, THE OIL INDUSTRY, THE VOTING PROCESS, THE FREE MARKET ECONOMY, CHRISTIANITY, JUDAISM, THE FAMILY IN GENERAL, PROPERTY RIGHTS…....

Anyone with even the vaguest concern for individual freedom would realize that socialism is a fatal desease dressed up as a social medicine for what ails us. Only they determine what ails us. SHUT THEM DOWN NOW BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE. FRANCE IS GONE. ENGLAND IS GOING. WE ARE NEXT. OUR PRESIDENT IS ASSAULTING ARIZONA, THE SUPREME COURT, THE MEDICAL INDUSTRY, THE MILITARY, OUR ALLIES, FOX NEWS, THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY, THE AUTO INDUSTRY, THE ENERGY INDUSTRY, THE OIL INDUSTRY, THE VOTING PROCESS, THE FREE MARKET ECONOMY, CHRISTIANITY, JUDAISM, THE FAMILY IN GENERAL, PROPERTY RIGHTS…....

Mark Kirk was against Don't Ask Don't Tell*, now he SAYS he is for it. Mark Kirk was for Cap and Trade, now he SAYS he is against it. Mark Kirk was for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, now he SAYS he is against it. Mark Kirk said he was in Military Intelligence, but admits that was a lie. Mark Kirk said he was a teacher, but admit that was a lie.

Mark Kirk said "I think we were lied to, in the end" about Bush and Iraq. As an Illinois voter I have to wonder, how do I know when HE is lying???

* Don't Ask Don't Tell is also known as "You are required to lie about yourself, we investigate you anyways"

One problem with this type of thinking: President Obama doesn't have a "radical leftist agenda {that} needs to be stopped ....". The term "radical leftist" is meaningless within an American political context. As for "stopping" it, most of the programs the so-called TEA Party writhes about (TARP, etc) were enacted under that radical leftist Bush Administration, along with the don't-tax-&-spend-like-a-drunken-sailor policies that created the calamities in the first place.

I am perfectly aware that the (aptly named) Right-Wing-Echo-Machine broadcasts the same nonsense day-in, day-out 24/7 over a thousand captive radio stations; their one-sided broadside aimed at the ignorant, prejudiced and uninformed. The handful of vastly wealthy people behind this smear campaign can do it not only because they have the financial wherewithal. Abolition of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" a few years back has something to do with it. Legally, they are not required to present the other side of the debate, so one only hears the sound of one hand clapping. The result is what one expects in garden spots of the universe like Castro's Cuba or Kim Jong-Il's North Korea (which Sarah Palin now knows isn't in Africa).

Not only are the anti-Obama screeds (misrepresented as "news" and "political analysis") actually opinion masquerading as fact, it is biased, empty-headed rhetoric; patently false when not ridiculous, monstrous or inane; accusations without foundation in the real world. Yet one sees such tripe regurgitated day after day as Gospel Truth by people such as yourself on commentary pages in "Politico" and elsewhere. Worse, it is presented by its clueless proponents as their original thinking; credulous posters who unwittingly reveal just how badly misled they really are.

It's a disheartening trend. People who spout such nonsense and idiocies simply cannot realize just how calculatedly false the garbage they regurgitate is. Worse, it is proof-positive that the American political system itself is beginning to unravel. As flawed and imperfect as it is, our political system worked down through the years thanks to an informed, somewhat educated electorate; passionately prejudiced to be sure; often inflexibly narrow-minded and provincial. But recent mass media-driven developments suggest that the same kind of crowding out of critical thinking that occurred during the Weimar Republic's dissolution period (1928-32) -- one of great economic and social stress and uncertainty in post WW-I Germany -- is now happening here. Limbaugh, Savage, Coulter, Ingraham, and Beck (to name just a few) are little more than circus clowns in a freak show, yet millions of Americans take them and their idiotic blather seriously.

Don't be a fool. Don't be played for one; don't try to play me for one. The idea of a "Senator" Kirk is unacceptable, as is the idea that a Republican-controlled Federal Legislative Branch would be good for the country (unless you want to see the United States of America degenerate into a militarized one-party authoritarian state like, say, Peron's Argentina or Franco's Spain). If you want George Washington's Republic to collapse into a political monstrosity by all means vote "Republican" (actually, "Republican" in name only; anti-republican in fact). Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.